Be advised. This submission either linked to an article written by the Forbes editorial staff or a contributor. Contributor articles are essentially op-ed or non-fact-checked pieces written by people recruited by Forbes and do not necessarily reflect the views of the actual Forbes editorial staff.
We'll end up with moated stablecoins (and fiat) systems just like China's CNY and CNH. It plays to countries best interest to have a currency for internal/regulated/controlled vs another used for external trade. The former gives you a way to control perceived inflation when the latter is what you try to print to export inflation/deflation.
Stables will be used primarily for the latter imo and that's why you'll see things like usdt and usat
Oh totally. The idea is to coop stablecoins back into the control structure for fiat. It's just fiat with modern rails.
Satoshi gave us the block chain and Bitcoin, tools on one hand is great for self custody... But the block chain itself is a perfect tool for totaltarian control as well if it's a centralized chain.
Completely agree. Blockchain tech is exactly the kind of tracking the government would want for fiat, but could adopt without acknowledging the benefits of Bitcoin.
There will be a day where the Bitcoin network is vilified and considered illegal, like gold in the 30s, but it won't be until the govt's cbdc is established and rooted.
Indeed. There's also the chance the mining and core devs are compromised and a fork is required... But then the institution owners already have undue influence on the new chains too.
We really need to incentivize full chain nodes because I believe the same. Pool consolidation (lots of pool operators closing), companies like black rock buying into hash rate, and core devs compromised are the exact way they'd do it.
We just need to maintain primary chain and node control.
(I also think they want to move all computational power into data centers to turn home computers to dumb terminals, but they aren't there yet) If that happens, we can't run our own nodes anymore.
Once stablecoins have a clearer rulebook, the edge shifts from regulatory arbitrage to actual usability. The winners won’t just be the biggest issuers, but the platforms that make stablecoins useful in daily life. That’s why apps like Oobit stand out to me they’re competing on execution and real world spending
Yeah this feels like the fog just lifted. No more hiding behind regulatory uncertainty. Now it’s straight up who has the best product and who gets washed...should be entertaining
tldr; The U.S. has introduced a clear regulatory framework for stablecoins, marking a significant shift in policy. The GENIUS Act mandates 1:1 backing with liquid assets, prohibits rehypothecation, and requires monthly audits, while the CLARITY Act defines regulatory boundaries. This creates a favorable environment for stablecoin issuers with institutional-grade infrastructure. Europe’s MiCA framework contrasts by prioritizing monetary sovereignty. Regulation now emphasizes operational maturity, cybersecurity, and compliance, favoring well-prepared issuers in a competitive global market.
*This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
Unfortunately tether isn't going down. It will be harder for tether to prop the price, but nothing is impossible. On top of that, some people see regulations as a bull sign.
Agreed. The part about monthly attestations and strict reserve rules is very clear. Basically forces issuers to act like mini banks instead of yield farms.
So these new rules and regulations…do they essentially force stablecoins to run on private or regulated blockchains? Unlike the public “decentralized “ ones like eth?
Not really. The rules don’t force stablecoins onto private chains, but they do raise the bar for how they’re operated on public ones. Most of the requirements are about the issuer, not the blockchain itself. You can still issue on public chains, but with institutional-grade controls layered on top.
Be advised. This submission either linked to an article written by the Forbes editorial staff or a contributor. Contributor articles are essentially op-ed or non-fact-checked pieces written by people recruited by Forbes and do not necessarily reflect the views of the actual Forbes editorial staff.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
So tether isn't currently compliant
And probably won't ever be.
should we be surprised, lol.
I mean yeah, what they have gotten away with is bonkers
they're releasing a US compliant one https://tether.io/news/tether-unveils-usat-its-planned-u-s-regulated-dollar-backed-stablecoin-and-will-appoint-bo-hines-as-ceo-of-tether-usat/
I've said this before and will say it here again.
We'll end up with moated stablecoins (and fiat) systems just like China's CNY and CNH. It plays to countries best interest to have a currency for internal/regulated/controlled vs another used for external trade. The former gives you a way to control perceived inflation when the latter is what you try to print to export inflation/deflation.
Stables will be used primarily for the latter imo and that's why you'll see things like usdt and usat
Also control. They will be able to view txs but you'll only be able to see your own.
They can't have people watching! Lol
Oh totally. The idea is to coop stablecoins back into the control structure for fiat. It's just fiat with modern rails.
Satoshi gave us the block chain and Bitcoin, tools on one hand is great for self custody... But the block chain itself is a perfect tool for totaltarian control as well if it's a centralized chain.
Completely agree. Blockchain tech is exactly the kind of tracking the government would want for fiat, but could adopt without acknowledging the benefits of Bitcoin.
There will be a day where the Bitcoin network is vilified and considered illegal, like gold in the 30s, but it won't be until the govt's cbdc is established and rooted.
Indeed. There's also the chance the mining and core devs are compromised and a fork is required... But then the institution owners already have undue influence on the new chains too.
New tech with new problems hahah
We really need to incentivize full chain nodes because I believe the same. Pool consolidation (lots of pool operators closing), companies like black rock buying into hash rate, and core devs compromised are the exact way they'd do it.
We just need to maintain primary chain and node control.
(I also think they want to move all computational power into data centers to turn home computers to dumb terminals, but they aren't there yet) If that happens, we can't run our own nodes anymore.
Once stablecoins have a clearer rulebook, the edge shifts from regulatory arbitrage to actual usability. The winners won’t just be the biggest issuers, but the platforms that make stablecoins useful in daily life. That’s why apps like Oobit stand out to me they’re competing on execution and real world spending
Yeah this feels like the fog just lifted. No more hiding behind regulatory uncertainty. Now it’s straight up who has the best product and who gets washed...should be entertaining
tldr; The U.S. has introduced a clear regulatory framework for stablecoins, marking a significant shift in policy. The GENIUS Act mandates 1:1 backing with liquid assets, prohibits rehypothecation, and requires monthly audits, while the CLARITY Act defines regulatory boundaries. This creates a favorable environment for stablecoin issuers with institutional-grade infrastructure. Europe’s MiCA framework contrasts by prioritizing monetary sovereignty. Regulation now emphasizes operational maturity, cybersecurity, and compliance, favoring well-prepared issuers in a competitive global market.
*This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
So that's why Bitcoin is going down? Tether pyramid scheme ends now?
Stablecoin usage supports and consolidates bitcoin’s position as digital gold
Stable coins are buying US treasury bonds and are backing the old Fiat system.
Folks who wish to spend BTC sell out to stable coins.
Stable coins are good for maintaining and prolonging the fiat system.
Please re read my comment lol
I did and I upvoted it, and provided my understanding of why your assertion is correct.
Unfortunately tether isn't going down. It will be harder for tether to prop the price, but nothing is impossible. On top of that, some people see regulations as a bull sign.
The four year cycle is doing what it is supposed to, bitcoin has nothing to do with tether.
This actually feels like a bigger shift than people realize. Once you move from “guidance” to actual written rules, the game changes fast.
Agreed. The part about monthly attestations and strict reserve rules is very clear. Basically forces issuers to act like mini banks instead of yield farms.
The Tokening is almost here.
So these new rules and regulations…do they essentially force stablecoins to run on private or regulated blockchains? Unlike the public “decentralized “ ones like eth?
Not really. The rules don’t force stablecoins onto private chains, but they do raise the bar for how they’re operated on public ones. Most of the requirements are about the issuer, not the blockchain itself. You can still issue on public chains, but with institutional-grade controls layered on top.
I see, I’ve just only seen after the bill passed, talks about JPM coin, tethers coin, and a few others running in their own chains
No
Let me guess...USD1 somehow made the cut? The exit ramp
Good now mint stables en masse and use em to pump btc thats the playbook